加藤视频

加藤视频 Online Course Quality Assurance Plan

Academic Technology Committee and Learning Technologies

Progression: the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.

Purpose

The purpose of this document is to define the roles of various stakeholders in the online course review process; outline the criteria used for prioritizing course reviews; distinguish between 加藤视频 Online master courses and faculty courses; and identify all asynchronous online courses to be included in a tiered review cycle. This is a 鈥渓iving document鈥� that will be collaboratively maintained by 加藤视频 Online, Learning Technologies and the faculty-led Academic Technology Committee (ATC). Updates may be warranted by changes to policy, college operating procedures, or the course catalog.

Introduction

In the decade since 加藤视频 adopted Canvas as our Learning Management System (LMS), the consistent growth in 加藤视频 Online enrollment and course offerings speaks to the importance of distance education in achieving the Florida SouthWestern State College鈥檚 Mission and Strategic Plan goals.Through shared governance, faculty and administrators have developed policies and practices to ensure the collaborative development of online courses that meet a set of defined quality standards. This has resulted in a mature and rich catalog of quality online course offerings developed by 加藤视频 faculty with support from Learning Technologies.

Figure 1: A Decade of Growth in Courses Offered Online
Academic Year Percentage of 加藤视频 Online Courses
2011-2012 26%
2012-2013 26%
2013-2014 27%
2014-2015 29%
2015-2016 30%
2016-2017 36%
2017-2018 39%
2018-2019 41%
2019-2020 41%
2020-2021 46%
2021-2022 54%
2022-2023 47%

As of AY 20-21, nearly half of the courses 加藤视频 offers can be taken in an asynchronous online option (Fig.1), demonstrating the faculty鈥檚 commitment to realizing our strategic initiative to engage in best practices to expand educational delivery techniques and skills to make learning broadly accessible, and responsive to best practices in higher education. As the demand for new online course development declines, the need for a quality assurance plan has emerged to ensure that established online courses engage in continuous improvement to keep up with rapidly evolving technology and distance learning pedagogy.

Furthermore, 加藤视频 is committed to upholding the standards set forth by national [02] and regional entities that govern distance education. The [03] informs the policies of regional accreditors [04], including the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools on Colleges (SACSCOC). The C-RAC interregional guidelines are outlined in [05] approved in September 2020 and the statements excerpted here make clear the expectation that:

  • The institution's plans for developing, sustaining and, if appropriate, expanding online learning offerings are integrated into its regular planning and evaluation processes as evidenced by

    • Development and ownership of plans for on-line learning extend beyond the administrators directly responsible for it and the programs directly using it.
    • Plans for expanding online learning demonstrate the institution鈥檚 capacity to assure an appropriate level of quality.

  • Online learning is incorporated into the institution鈥檚 systems of governance and academic oversight as evidenced by

    • The institution鈥檚 faculty have a designated role in the design and implementation of its online learning offerings.
    • The institution ensures the rigor of the offerings and the quality of the instruction.
    • Approval of online courses and programs follows standard processes used in the college or university.
    • Online learning courses and programs are evaluated on a periodic basis.

  • Curricula for the institution's online learning offerings are coherent, cohesive, and comparable in academic rigor to programs offered in traditional instructional formats as evidenced by

    • The curricular goals and course objectives show that the institution or program has knowledge of the best uses of online learning in different disciplines and settings.
    • Course design and delivery supports student-student and faculty-student interaction.

  • Faculty responsible for delivering the online learning curricula and evaluating the students鈥� success in achieving the online learning goals are appropriately qualified and effectively supported as evidenced by

    • On-line learning faculties are carefully selected, appropriately trained, frequently evaluated, and are marked by an acceptable level of turnover.
    • Faculty members engaged in online learning share in the mission and goals of the institution and its programs and are provided the opportunities to contribute to the broader activities of the institution.

In 2020, the assumed a leadership role in the revision of the 2011 C-RAC interregional guidelines and proposed a new set of [06]. As a member institution, 加藤视频 agrees to comply with these guidelines and, of direct relevance here, the expectations that:

  • The academic team includes individuals with expertise in the subject-matter, instructional design, interaction with students, and assessment of student learning.
  • Learning activities and assessments are aligned with measurable learning outcomes. Formative and summative assessments of student learning provide feedback to students and serve as a basis for program improvement.
  • Programs offered through distance learning are reviewed on a regular cycle that includes external perspectives.

With the ratification of the 2022-2025 Collective Negotiations Agreement (CNA) [07] 加藤视频 adopted the to align our standards with and modified the model for online course development to distinguish between 鈥溂犹偈悠� Master Online Courses鈥� and faculty-owned courses, of which both are required to meet adopted quality standards as outlined in Article 8 of the CNA:

  • All new online courses must be evaluated using a QM rubric and must meet the Quality Matters Review Expectations to be placed on the schedule. A tiered schedule for existing courses will be developed in collaboration with 加藤视频 Online, Learning Technologies and the Academic Technology Committee (ATC).

The following sections provide information on the Online Course Quality Assurance Plan stakeholders and criteria used in establishing the priority of course reviews.

Stakeholders

The successful implementation and execution of this quality assurance plan are dependent on representatives from Academic Affairs and Learning Technologies. The commitment and engagement of the key faculty, staff and administrators outlined below are necessary to sustain the process of continuous improvement.

Table 1: Role and responsibilities of stakeholders in 加藤视频’s Online Quality Assurance Plan.
Stakeholder Department Responsibilities
AVP, Strategic Innovation and Online Learning VPAA’s Office Ensure resources are available to support the Quality Assurance Plan and facilitate the process of continuous improvement
Director, Learning Technologies Office of Information Technology, Learning Technologies Oversee the project management for online course developments.
Instructional Designers Learning Technologies Facilitate and participate in internal QM reviews and provide support for faculty developers
Faculty Online Course Reviewer Coordinators 加藤视频 Online Complete internal and official QM course reviews and provide support for faculty developers
Faculty QM Certified Peer Reviewers Academic Affairs and 加藤视频 Online Complete internal and official QM course reviews
Faculty Course Developers Respective Academic Departments Develop, revise and maintain online courses to meet QM Rubric Standards and engage in the process of continuous improvement
Academic Deans Academic Affairs Evaluate the need for online course development and “master” status in collaboration with faculty

The Course Review Cycle

The provides a tiered schedule of course reviews. In accordance with the CNA, each online course will be reviewed upon its initial development to ensure it meets quality standards before being placed on the schedule. At a minimum, each course should undergo a subsequent review again in five (5) years in order to retain any Florida Online Course Design Quality Designations and/or Quality Matters certifications. As a member of the , 加藤视频 course reviews follow the Quality Matters review model, which relies on collaboration between stakeholders to ensure the course meets expectations. (Fig. 2).

Cycle diagram where a course is created and then undergoes course review, which leads to feedback and course revision, which leads to the course meeting quality expectations, this cycle repeats.
Figure 2: Quality Matters Course Review Process

Incremental course updates over time are normal and expected, but courses may be prioritized for earlier review if there are significant changes to the course design. These may include, but are not limited to:

  • More than 20% of the course or module learning outcomes have changed.
  • More than 20% of the course as a whole has changed.
  • Instructional materials are converted to Open Educational Resources (OER).
  • New textbook adoptions.

Textbook edition updates typically do not result in a significant change to course design and can be made without a full re-review. Instructional design support is available as needed and can be requested using the .

When a course is due for a quality review, Learning Technologies will contact the Dean and work with stakeholders (Table 1) to coordinate the review as indicated in the course review cycle timeline (Table 2). At the conclusion of a review the course either does or does not yet meet standards and follows the Post-Review procedures in Table 3.

Table 2: Course Review Cycle Timeline
Pre-Review One (1) month prior to the start of the course review cycle
  1. Courses due for review are identified in the .
  2. Learning Technolgies notifies key stakeholders by email and provides an outline of the review process.
  3. Type of review is determined (e.g. internal or official QM review).
  4. Peer reviewers are selected (minimum of two per course for internal reviews).
Active Review Week 1 (Semester Start)
  1. Reviewers are added to a copy of the course in the student role.
  2. Review is opened in the QM Course Review Management System
Weeks 2-8
  1. Individual reviews are conducted.
  2. Communication occurs as needed.
Post-Review Week 9 (Mid Semester)
  1. Faculty developer and/Dean is provided a Course Review Report with helpful recommendations from the reviewers.
  2. The outcome of the review is determined. The course either does or does not yet meet standards and follows the procedures in Table 3.
14 Weeks after Course Review Report
  1. If required, the course enters the amendment phase and follows the procedures in Table 3.
Table 3: Post-Review Procedures Based on Review Outcome
Post-Review Outcome Post-Review Procedures
The review indicates the course does meet quality standards
  1. The course permissions, quality designation, date of last review and date of next review are updated in the .
  2. Learning Technologies will notify appropriate stakeholders that the course can remain on the schedule.
  3. Learning Technologies will offer the faculty developer an opportunity to submit the course for QM Certification, following QM processes and protocols. The offical QM external review leads to QM certification.
The review indicates the course does not yet meet quality standards
  1. The faculty developer and/or academic dean will be notified of the review outcome and provided the following documentation:
    • An outline and timeline of the course amendment process.
    • A Course Review Report with helpful recommendations from the reviewers.
    • An Amendment Form outlining the quality standards that need to be addressed in the course.
  2. An instructional designer will be assigned as a contact for the faculty developer to provide support in amending the course as needed.
  3. The faculty developer will complete the Amendment Form to record the changes made to the course to meet expectations. Instructional design support will be provided as needed.
  4. The amendment process must be completed within 14 weeks of the Course Review Report notification and before being placed on the schedule (CNA, Article 8). In the event a course needs a full redesign, the course development timeline will be extended to 20 weeks.
  5. Once the course has been amended, a certified peer reviewer will review the changes and approve the Amendment Form.
  6. This process is repeated until the course meets standards. There is no difference between a course that meets expectations upon the initial review and one that meets expectations upon revision.
  7. The procedures outlined above for courses that do meet standards are executed.

加藤视频 Online Master Courses

The definition and processes for determining, developing, distributing and compensating 加藤视频 Online master courses are outlined in the current CNA [07] and in College Operating Procedure (COP) 03-0802 Course Development and Course Redesign for Courses Requiring Online Content (PDF) [08]. Selected excerpts are highlighted here:

Reference Documents

Academic Technology Committee Approved: 10/15/2021

Updated 6/14/2024